NPR

Secret Recording Shows NRA Treasurer Plotting to Conceal Extravagant Expenses Involving Wayne LaPierre

Audio obtained by The Trace and ProPublica reveals, in real time, the gun lobbying group enacting a plan that would conceal payments for fancy hotels, limousines and other luxury expenses connected to its longtime CEO for a decade.

.....

Rhubarb & Custard wrote: ↑Sat Jan 13, 2024 4:14 pm bit weird when she said China was going to go and get Hong Kong, I wonder if she knows where/what Hong Kong is

Calculon wrote: ↑Sat Jan 13, 2024 11:22 pm

Rhubarb & Custard wrote: ↑Sat Jan 13, 2024 4:14 pm bit weird when she said China was going to go and get Hong Kong, I wonder if she knows where/what Hong Kong is

This is really silly, of course she knows what Hong Kong is. No one is claiming she's a genius and speaking to a Fox News audience at their level is always going to make you sound pretty basic but come one...

Calculon wrote: ↑Sat Jan 13, 2024 11:22 pm

Rhubarb & Custard wrote: ↑Sat Jan 13, 2024 4:14 pm bit weird when she said China was going to go and get Hong Kong, I wonder if she knows where/what Hong Kong is

This is really silly, of course she knows what Hong Kong is. No one is claiming she's a genius and speaking to a Fox News audience at their level is always going to make you sound pretty basic but come one...

Rhubarb & Custard wrote: ↑Sat Jan 13, 2024 11:25 pm

Calculon wrote: ↑Sat Jan 13, 2024 11:22 pm

Rhubarb & Custard wrote: ↑Sat Jan 13, 2024 4:14 pm bit weird when she said China was going to go and get Hong Kong, I wonder if she knows where/what Hong Kong is

This is really silly, of course she knows what Hong Kong is. No one is claiming she's a genius and speaking to a Fox News audience at their level is always going to make you sound pretty basic but come one...

I'm only noting the part where she spoke utter bollocks came across a bit weird. And it's not like there's a shortage of things one could actually use to highlight problems with China, so why invent one that makes one look an idiot?

Calculon wrote: ↑Sat Jan 13, 2024 11:54 pm

Rhubarb & Custard wrote: ↑Sat Jan 13, 2024 11:25 pm

Calculon wrote: ↑Sat Jan 13, 2024 11:22 pm

This is really silly, of course she knows what Hong Kong is. No one is claiming she's a genius and speaking to a Fox News audience at their level is always going to make you sound pretty basic but come one...

I'm only noting the part where she spoke utter bollocks came across a bit weird. And it's not like there's a shortage of things one could actually use to highlight problems with China, so why invent one that makes one look an idiot?

IIRC what she said was correct, if a bit weird. it was fine in the context of giving an answer for that audience. pretty sure that coming across as very intelligent, not saying Niki Haley can do that, would be a turn off for many Republican voters

Biffer wrote: ↑Wed Jan 03, 2024 10:42 pm

fishfoodie wrote: ↑Wed Jan 03, 2024 9:53 pm There are at least two topics in American politics where there is no, winning, just degrees of losing:

1) Abortion - You'll always piss off someone
2) Israel - See #1

3. Gun Control

Rhubarb & Custard wrote: ↑Sun Jan 14, 2024 8:28 am

Calculon wrote: ↑Sat Jan 13, 2024 11:54 pm

Rhubarb & Custard wrote: ↑Sat Jan 13, 2024 11:25 pm

I'm only noting the part where she spoke utter bollocks came across a bit weird. And it's not like there's a shortage of things one could actually use to highlight problems with China, so why invent one that makes one look an idiot?

IIRC what she said was correct, if a bit weird. it was fine in the context of giving an answer for that audience. pretty sure that coming across as very intelligent, not saying Niki Haley can do that, would be a turn off for many Republican voters

'China said they were going to take Hong Kong, it happened'

But the inference from that is surely they took it be use of force, or perhaps some other coercive means, and not simply the lease ran out and it defaulted back to Chinese control. And especially that's the inference set alongside a series of other threats being made by authoritarians. And if she wants to be strong on authoritarians there remains the problem she lacks the will to call out the fat orange wanker

Thatcher later said that Deng told her bluntly that China could easily take Hong Kong by force, stating that "I could walk in and take the whole lot this afternoon", to which she replied that "there is nothing I could do to stop you, but the eyes of the world would now know what China is like".[37]

Calculon wrote: ↑Sun Jan 14, 2024 10:26 am

Rhubarb & Custard wrote: ↑Sun Jan 14, 2024 8:28 am

Calculon wrote: ↑Sat Jan 13, 2024 11:54 pm

IIRC what she said was correct, if a bit weird. it was fine in the context of giving an answer for that audience. pretty sure that coming across as very intelligent, not saying Niki Haley can do that, would be a turn off for many Republican voters

'China said they were going to take Hong Kong, it happened'

But the inference from that is surely they took it be use of force, or perhaps some other coercive means, and not simply the lease ran out and it defaulted back to Chinese control. And especially that's the inference set alongside a series of other threats being made by authoritarians. And if she wants to be strong on authoritarians there remains the problem she lacks the will to call out the fat orange wanker

I don't want to defend this one awkward statement of hers but HK island and Kowloon were ceded in perpetuity to the UK. In 1979 the Brits told the Chinese that it would be better if post 1997 they continue to administer not only HK island and Kowloon Peninsula, as is their legal right, but also continue to administer the New Territories. Deng Xiaoping told them that China will not only take back the New Territories but the whole of HK, and they did.

Thatcher later said that Deng told her bluntly that China could easily take Hong Kong by force, stating that "I could walk in and take the whole lot this afternoon", to which she replied that "there is nothing I could do to stop you, but the eyes of the world would now know what China is like".[37]

fishfoodie wrote: ↑Sun Jan 14, 2024 6:38 pm She re-negotiate their pre-nup, & now her kid gets an equal share of his estate, to his other adult kids, where originally he got no share, that was the price of her staying with him after the porn star & all their other bullshit.

Hal Jordan wrote: ↑Sun Jan 14, 2024 9:25 pm

fishfoodie wrote: ↑Sun Jan 14, 2024 6:38 pm She re-negotiate their pre-nup, & now her kid gets an equal share of his estate, to his other adult kids, where originally he got no share, that was the price of her staying with him after the porn star & all their other bullshit.

His estate will be eaten by his creditors catching up and the litigation the brood will launch against each other.

Rhubarb & Custard wrote: ↑Sun Jan 14, 2024 9:21 pm

Calculon wrote: ↑Sun Jan 14, 2024 10:26 am

I don't want to defend this one awkward statement of hers but HK island and Kowloon were ceded in perpetuity to the UK. In 1979 the Brits told the Chinese that it would be better if post 1997 they continue to administer not only HK island and Kowloon Peninsula, as is their legal right, but also continue to administer the New Territories. Deng Xiaoping told them that China will not only take back the New Territories but the whole of HK, and they did.

If you don't want to defend the awkward statement don't. Also look up the 99 year lease, the one which expired in '97 (was it '97?)

Unless in the 1970s one had a way to extend the lease it was a done deal, sure the British could ask, but China could simply say no. Had to see what 'rights' the British had to rule post 1997

Even if someone Britain had wrangled some sort of legal claim logistically how would one serve the territory if China opposed and proved truculent around say use of ports, supply of utilities... . There was simply no need to say China was threatening to take HK, it was always going back to them, only an idiot would claim otherwise.

simply the lease ran out and it defaulted back to Chinese control.

Calculon wrote: ↑Mon Jan 15, 2024 5:19 am

Rhubarb & Custard wrote: ↑Sun Jan 14, 2024 9:21 pm

Calculon wrote: ↑Sun Jan 14, 2024 10:26 am

I don't want to defend this one awkward statement of hers but HK island and Kowloon were ceded in perpetuity to the UK. In 1979 the Brits told the Chinese that it would be better if post 1997 they continue to administer not only HK island and Kowloon Peninsula, as is their legal right, but also continue to administer the New Territories. Deng Xiaoping told them that China will not only take back the New Territories but the whole of HK, and they did.

If you don't want to defend the awkward statement don't. Also look up the 99 year lease, the one which expired in '97 (was it '97?)

Unless in the 1970s one had a way to extend the lease it was a done deal, sure the British could ask, but China could simply say no. Had to see what 'rights' the British had to rule post 1997

Even if someone Britain had wrangled some sort of legal claim logistically how would one serve the territory if China opposed and proved truculent around say use of ports, supply of utilities... . There was simply no need to say China was threatening to take HK, it was always going back to them, only an idiot would claim otherwise.

Again... legally the UK had every right to administer Hong Kong Island and the Kowloon
peninsula in perpetuity. Practically, it would have been difficult without the New Territories and especially without Chinese cooperation. The Chinese DID threaten to take Hong Kong Island and Kowloon by force if the Brits, who again, had a legal right to administer the Territories in perpetuity, did not leave. So although, imo, she phrased it awkwardly, she was correct.

I think Nikki Haley has a better understanding of the Hong Kong handover than you because this:

simply the lease ran out and it defaulted back to Chinese control.

is just wrong, which is why there where many rounds of negotiations before the Sino-British Joint Declaration

Kiwias wrote: ↑Sun Jan 14, 2024 10:22 am de Santis trolled brutally at Iowa meeting

Rhubarb & Custard wrote: ↑Mon Jan 15, 2024 10:49 am

Calculon wrote: ↑Mon Jan 15, 2024 5:19 am

Rhubarb & Custard wrote: ↑Sun Jan 14, 2024 9:21 pm

If you don't want to defend the awkward statement don't. Also look up the 99 year lease, the one which expired in '97 (was it '97?)

Unless in the 1970s one had a way to extend the lease it was a done deal, sure the British could ask, but China could simply say no. Had to see what 'rights' the British had to rule post 1997

Even if someone Britain had wrangled some sort of legal claim logistically how would one serve the territory if China opposed and proved truculent around say use of ports, supply of utilities... . There was simply no need to say China was threatening to take HK, it was always going back to them, only an idiot would claim otherwise.

Again... legally the UK had every right to administer Hong Kong Island and the Kowloon
peninsula in perpetuity. Practically, it would have been difficult without the New Territories and especially without Chinese cooperation. The Chinese DID threaten to take Hong Kong Island and Kowloon by force if the Brits, who again, had a legal right to administer the Territories in perpetuity, did not leave. So although, imo, she phrased it awkwardly, she was correct.

I think Nikki Haley has a better understanding of the Hong Kong handover than you because this:

simply the lease ran out and it defaulted back to Chinese control.

is just wrong, which is why there where many rounds of negotiations before the Sino-British Joint Declaration

It practically could not have been done, any suggestions otherwise are idiotic.

Calculon wrote: ↑Mon Jan 15, 2024 2:40 pm

Rhubarb & Custard wrote: ↑Mon Jan 15, 2024 10:49 am

Calculon wrote: ↑Mon Jan 15, 2024 5:19 am

Again... legally the UK had every right to administer Hong Kong Island and the Kowloon
peninsula in perpetuity. Practically, it would have been difficult without the New Territories and especially without Chinese cooperation. The Chinese DID threaten to take Hong Kong Island and Kowloon by force if the Brits, who again, had a legal right to administer the Territories in perpetuity, did not leave. So although, imo, she phrased it awkwardly, she was correct.

I think Nikki Haley has a better understanding of the Hong Kong handover than you because this:
is just wrong, which is why there where many rounds of negotiations before the Sino-British Joint Declaration

It practically could not have been done, any suggestions otherwise are idiotic.

So you finally get it that the lease did not cover HK island and that the Chinese did threaten the UK, so what Niki Haley said was not in fact "utter bollocks"

Sinkers wrote: ↑Mon Jan 15, 2024 11:04 pm I doubt that she’s thick. I suspect she knows exactly which buttons to push (china) and which to avoid (slavery).

Gumboot wrote: ↑Mon Jan 15, 2024 11:39 pm

Sinkers wrote: ↑Mon Jan 15, 2024 11:04 pm I doubt that she’s thick. I suspect she knows exactly which buttons to push (china) and which to avoid (slavery).

I'm not sure trying to avoid pushing that particular button worked out very well for her...

A serious lack of judgement on her part imho; a disingenuous deflection which was never going to fly coming from anyone, let alone the former governor of the first state that voted to secede from the Union in 1860.

But hey, as long as the MAGA base laps it up and the donations keep rolling in, right "Ambassador"?

Rhubarb & Custard wrote: ↑Mon Jan 15, 2024 4:13 pm

Calculon wrote: ↑Mon Jan 15, 2024 2:40 pm

Rhubarb & Custard wrote: ↑Mon Jan 15, 2024 10:49 am

It practically could not have been done, any suggestions otherwise are idiotic.

So you finally get it that the lease did not cover HK island and that the Chinese did threaten the UK, so what Niki Haley said was not in fact "utter bollocks"

In any practical sense there was a lease, it was expiring, and there was nothing to be done unless China oddly went along with a request from the UK that it/we should maintain control.

It's a small point amongst what she was saying there, and hardly as bad as her failure to answer to the reasons for the Civil War, but she was wrong, and there were/are plenty of examples she could have used were she not thick as mince.

Gumboot wrote: ↑Mon Jan 15, 2024 11:39 pm

Sinkers wrote: ↑Mon Jan 15, 2024 11:04 pm I doubt that she’s thick. I suspect she knows exactly which buttons to push (china) and which to avoid (slavery).

I'm not sure trying to avoid pushing that particular button worked out very well for her...

A serious lack of judgement on her part imho; a disingenuous deflection which was never going to fly coming from anyone, let alone the former governor of the first state that voted to secede from the Union in 1860.

But hey, as long as the MAGA base laps it up and the donations keep rolling in, right "Ambassador"?

Slick wrote: ↑Tue Jan 16, 2024 10:27 am Trump increases his vote with women, young voters and evangelicals.... what the fuck is wrong with these people

Calculon wrote: ↑Tue Jan 16, 2024 11:04 am

Gumboot wrote: ↑Mon Jan 15, 2024 11:39 pm

Sinkers wrote: ↑Mon Jan 15, 2024 11:04 pm I doubt that she’s thick. I suspect she knows exactly which buttons to push (china) and which to avoid (slavery).

I'm not sure trying to avoid pushing that particular button worked out very well for her...

A serious lack of judgement on her part imho; a disingenuous deflection which was never going to fly coming from anyone, let alone the former governor of the first state that voted to secede from the Union in 1860.

But hey, as long as the MAGA base laps it up and the donations keep rolling in, right "Ambassador"?

She's hated by MAGA who regard her as a RINO, anchor baby and a warmonger. She's also now stated that
she's not willing to be Trump's VP.

Calculon wrote: ↑Tue Jan 16, 2024 11:01 am

Rhubarb & Custard wrote: ↑Mon Jan 15, 2024 4:13 pm

Calculon wrote: ↑Mon Jan 15, 2024 2:40 pm

So you finally get it that the lease did not cover HK island and that the Chinese did threaten the UK, so what Niki Haley said was not in fact "utter bollocks"

In any practical sense there was a lease, it was expiring, and there was nothing to be done unless China oddly went along with a request from the UK that it/we should maintain control.

It's a small point amongst what she was saying there, and hardly as bad as her failure to answer to the reasons for the Civil War, but she was wrong, and there were/are plenty of examples she could have used were she not thick as mince.

And oddly enough China did initially propose exchanging sovereignty over HK for continued
British administration. Exactly like how they did with
Macau and Portugal . So the idea was not that far fetched and the reason why the British initially pushed the idea despite the PRC subsequenly changing their minds (and threatening the Brits).

Rhubarb & Custard wrote: ↑Tue Jan 16, 2024 11:17 am

Calculon wrote: ↑Tue Jan 16, 2024 11:01 am

Rhubarb & Custard wrote: ↑Mon Jan 15, 2024 4:13 pm

In any practical sense there was a lease, it was expiring, and there was nothing to be done unless China oddly went along with a request from the UK that it/we should maintain control.

It's a small point amongst what she was saying there, and hardly as bad as her failure to answer to the reasons for the Civil War, but she was wrong, and there were/are plenty of examples she could have used were she not thick as mince.

And oddly enough China did initially propose exchanging sovereignty over HK for continued
British administration. Exactly like how they did with
Macau and Portugal . So the idea was not that far fetched and the reason why the British initially pushed the idea despite the PRC subsequenly changing their minds (and threatening the Brits).

Well now I know something was at one point possibly mooted but never came to pass that makes her madness reasonable.

There is some claim that Britain could have continued rule, but (a) China disputes many of the older treaties asserting they were established in wholly unfair manner, and (b) the area we could perhaps in theory have retained is a tiny part without the new territories, it's not worth it in itself, and it wouldn't have been practicable anyway. One might try to gloss over just how much China would have objected, but it's hard enough keeping hold of some marbles these days, HK would have proved a whole different level of challenge.

Haley is a moron, she picked an example knowing feck all about it, and there are plenty of easy examples she could have picked to cite Chinese expansionist outlook she overlooked in order to pick one which makes no sense. One might as well say if you keep jumping a little bit higher eventually you'll touch the moon, well maybe not quite that, but what she said in that line remains gibberish

Gumboot wrote: ↑Tue Jan 16, 2024 11:17 am

Calculon wrote: ↑Tue Jan 16, 2024 11:04 am

Gumboot wrote: ↑Mon Jan 15, 2024 11:39 pm

I'm not sure trying to avoid pushing that particular button worked out very well for her...

A serious lack of judgement on her part imho; a disingenuous deflection which was never going to fly coming from anyone, let alone the former governor of the first state that voted to secede from the Union in 1860.

But hey, as long as the MAGA base laps it up and the donations keep rolling in, right "Ambassador"?

She's hated by MAGA who regard her as a RINO, anchor baby and a warmonger. She's also now stated that
she's not willing to be Trump's VP.

Not sure what you see in her tbh. The best of a bunch of busted also-rans?

Do you really believe a word that dribbles out of the corner of her crooked mouth at this late stage? C'mon man, she'll say anything to stay in the base's good graces. And regardless of what she says, there's no chance she'd turn down a shot to be The Donald's VP.

Calculon wrote: ↑Tue Jan 16, 2024 12:51 pm

Rhubarb & Custard wrote: ↑Tue Jan 16, 2024 11:17 am

Calculon wrote: ↑Tue Jan 16, 2024 11:01 am

And oddly enough China did initially propose exchanging sovereignty over HK for continued
British administration. Exactly like how they did with
Macau and Portugal . So the idea was not that far fetched and the reason why the British initially pushed the idea despite the PRC subsequenly changing their minds (and threatening the Brits).

Well now I know something was at one point possibly mooted but never came to pass that makes her madness reasonable.

There is some claim that Britain could have continued rule, but (a) China disputes many of the older treaties asserting they were established in wholly unfair manner, and (b) the area we could perhaps in theory have retained is a tiny part without the new territories, it's not worth it in itself, and it wouldn't have been practicable anyway. One might try to gloss over just how much China would have objected, but it's hard enough keeping hold of some marbles these days, HK would have proved a whole different level of challenge.

Haley is a moron, she picked an example knowing feck all about it, and there are plenty of easy examples she could have picked to cite Chinese expansionist outlook she overlooked in order to pick one which makes no sense. One might as well say if you keep jumping a little bit higher eventually you'll touch the moon, well maybe not quite that, but what she said in that line remains gibberish

What example should she have used instead of the Hong Kong one?

Rhubarb & Custard wrote: ↑Tue Jan 16, 2024 2:53 pm But the Republicans are now in more of a pro-Russia phase